October 2020
Volume 20, Issue 11
Open Access
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   October 2020
Are target representations affected by search prevalence rates?
Author Affiliations
  • Michael Miuccio
    University of Central Florida
  • Cianna Piercey
    Universite de Fribourg
  • Joseph Schmidt
    Universite McGill
Journal of Vision October 2020, Vol.20, 836. doi:https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.20.11.836
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Michael Miuccio, Cianna Piercey, Joseph Schmidt; Are target representations affected by search prevalence rates?. Journal of Vision 2020;20(11):836. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.20.11.836.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Low-prevalence search targets are missed disproportionately more often than high-prevalence targets (Wolfe et al., 2005). Such errors have been attributed to multiple sources, including shifting decision criterion (Wolfe, et al., 2010), target recognition errors (Godwin, et al., 2014; Schwark et al., 2013), and motor response errors (Fleck & Mitroff, 2007; Rich et al., 2008). However, recent findings indicate that the mental representation of the target has a substantial impact on later search performance (Schmidt, et al., 2014). Furthermore, when a difficult search is expected, a more detailed target representation is maintained in visual working memory (VWM; Schmidt & Zelinsky, 2017). In the current study, we examined whether the increased difficulty associated with a low-prevalence search affects the VWM representation of a target, as measured by contralateral delay activity (CDA). Participants were cued with a pictorial preview of two different target stimuli (200 ms), drawn from 18 potential real-world object target categories. CDA was assessed in the delay period after preview offset (1000 ms) but prior to search. Targets and distractors consisted of 22 real-world objects evenly drawn from the previewed categories. Target prevalence was blocked with order counter-balanced across observers. High-prevalence search consisted of 90% target present trials and low-prevalence search consisted of 10% target present trials. Consistent with previous reports, preliminary results suggest that target detection accuracy decreased in low-prevalence (42%) relative to high-prevalence search (79%). Interestingly, preliminary results also indicate that low-prevalence target-related CDA (M = -0.79) may be larger than high-prevalence target-related CDA (M = -0.39). These early findings suggest that the expectation of a difficult low-prevalence search results in more target details extracted from the preview. This raises the intriguing possibility that some low-prevalence misses could be avoided by optimizing the target representation.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×